Quadro M3000 SE vs Radeon R7 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking525not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.52no data
Power efficiency5.46no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameBonaireGM204
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date17 December 2013 (10 years ago)2 October 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7681024
Core clock speedno data540 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0034.56
Floating-point processing power1.536 TFLOPS1.106 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4864

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotMXM Module
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s160.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-5.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 December 2013 2 October 2016
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 75 Watt

M3000 SE has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 260 and Quadro M3000 SE. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260 is a desktop card while Quadro M3000 SE is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R7 260
Radeon R7 260
NVIDIA Quadro M3000 SE
Quadro M3000 SE

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 50 votes

Rate Radeon R7 260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Quadro M3000 SE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.